Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Justis v. Justis, 384 N.W.2d 885.

54 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Oluwafunbi Ige Olusina, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
In fact, a fair and equitable division “does not require the [district] court to apportion marital debts[,]” and “[a] party to a dissolution may be held liable for marital debts even though the other party receives the benefit of payment.” (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Kreidler, d at 784; see Dahlberg, d at 80 (noting that district courts are not required to credit party for debts voluntarily paid before trial); (reasoning that district courts are not required to apportion marital debts to both parties and that “[a] party to a dissolution may be held liable for marital debts even though 5 Husband claims that the record also shows a fourth payment towards this debt.
In re the Marriage of: Pamela Jo Pemberton, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
d 885, 889 (Minn. App. 1986), rev. denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Robert Thomas Brown, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
706, 712 (Minn. App. 1996); rev. denied (Minn. May 29, 1986); -29 (Minn. App. 1984) (concluding as a matter of first impression that debts are apportionable as property 11 under the definition of marital property in the precursor to Minn. Stat. § 518.003, subd.
In re the Marriage of: Jessica Elizabeth Solinsky, n/k/a Jessica Elizabeth Grimm, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Distribution of the debt did not need to be equal, only “just and equitable.” -89 (Minn. App. 1986), rev. denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2020
1 (2018), but it need not be mathematically equal, review denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Kristine Ann Spratt Hansen, n/k/a Kristine Ann Spratt, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“Debt is apportionable as part of the marital property settlement .” review denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Donald Henry Off, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“Debt is apportionable as part of the marital property settlement.” Justis v. Justis , review denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Richard T. Hudgins, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
–92 (Minn. App. 1986) (noting that a spousal maintenance award is not an abuse of discretion simply because it leaves a spouse with a monthly deficit), review denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2020
review denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Kathleen Marie Tiedke, nka Kathleen Marie Freitag, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Justis v. Justis , review denied (Minn. May 29, 1986) .
In re the Marriage of: Bijoy Raghavan, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
review denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Sandra Kay Vogt, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Justis v. Justis , review denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Lana Michelle Kerola v. Greg William Kerola Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Lana Michelle Kerola v. Greg William Kerola Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Reno L. Brandt v. Jessie J. Johnson, f/k/a Jessie J. Brandt Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Reno L. Brandt v. Jessie J. Johnson, f/k/a Jessie J. Brandt Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Beth Carolyn Potter v. Joseph Leroy Potter Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Beth Carolyn Potter v. Joseph Leroy Potter Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. May 29, 8 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Nicole Ruth Sela v. Amit Yitzhak Sela Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Nicole Ruth Sela v. Amit Yitzhak Sela Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[P]roperty division need not be mathematically equal to be just and equitable.” review denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
In re the Marriage of: Anita Joan Rakow v. Gary Arnold Rakow, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Anita Joan Rakow v. Gary Arnold Rakow, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
87 (Minn. App. 1989) (“recogniz[ing] that the evidence indicates [the husband] would need $3174, $201 more than he actually earns, to cover $1745 in personal expenses, maintenance of $900, and debt of $529” but concluding that “trial court’s determination that this level of maintenance is appropriate, given all the circumstances of the case, is not an abuse of discretion”); 891–92 (Minn. App. 1986) (stating that “[i]t is evident, under the 7 circumstances, that [the husband]’s income is insuffic
Luthen v. Luthen 596 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Luthen v. Luthen 596 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
See generally, -89 (Minn.App.1986) (stating apportionment of marital debt to be treated same as distribution of property), review denied (Minn. May 29, 1986).
Marriage of Berenberg v. Berenberg 474 N.W.2d 843 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Marriage of Berenberg v. Berenberg 474 N.W.2d 843 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
-89 (Minn.App.1986), pet.
Marriage of Pavlasek v. Pavlasek 415 N.W.2d 42 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Pavlasek v. Pavlasek 415 N.W.2d 42 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Digatono v. Digatono 414 N.W.2d 498 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Digatono v. Digatono 414 N.W.2d 498 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Dorweiler v. Dorweiler 413 N.W.2d 572 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Southwell v. Southwell 413 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Dorweiler v. Dorweiler 413 N.W.2d 572 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Southwell v. Southwell 413 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Huston v. Huston 412 N.W.2d 344 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Huston v. Huston 412 N.W.2d 344 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
-91 (Minn.Ct.App.1986), pet.
Marriage of Lynch v. Lynch 411 N.W.2d 263 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Lynch v. Lynch 411 N.W.2d 263 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Paul v. Paul 410 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Smith v. Smith 410 N.W.2d 334 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Smith v. Smith 410 N.W.2d 334 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Paul v. Paul 410 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
(“Findings are not required on each factor considered.”), pet.
Marriage of Jensen v. Jensen 409 N.W.2d 60 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Jensen v. Jensen 409 N.W.2d 60 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Weikle v. Weikle 403 N.W.2d 682 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Weikle v. Weikle 403 N.W.2d 682 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Strauch v. Strauch 401 N.W.2d 444 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Strauch v. Strauch 401 N.W.2d 444 Minn. Ct. App. 1987

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by